[More police power in Little India shows the institutional challenge side of story. It also posts a constitutional struggle for being a police state by giving extra power to the police. ]
The publication of “The Singapore Constitution: A Brief Introduction”#1 by a
group of SMU students clearly shows that there is a lack of constitutional
education in Singapore. In addition to the insufficient education, ‘3 out 4
local lawyers leave practice in the first 10 years practising law’ indicates the
constitutional struggles in Singapore. Why is there no interest in fighting
justice in the Courts? Very few Singaporeans have in fact a serious
understanding of our Constitution, even within the law practice
professionals.
Institutional
challenge can come from external factors as shown in the Little India riot. But the
greatest institutional challenge may be the philosophical questions of ‘are we
proud of being Singaporeans’ and ‘Singapore belongs to whom – rich or poor Singaporeans’.
Since independence, Singapore
under the PAP government has wanted to project a ‘strong’ institution and
‘weak’ constitution in the running of the country. As what the PAP claimed we
need a strong institution so that we can deal with all the difficult problems
facing a new nation. Our economic model
is also based on this format so that we can have an efficient market
environment.
This model has worked
well. It is so successful that Singapore
is now one of the richest nations in the world. Unfortunately, we have reached
a turning point, a new political norm that posts many institutional challenges
and constitutional struggles for Singapore.
The following examples
show the ‘loose’ definition of institutional challenges in Singapore:
-Little India Riot;
-SMRT bus drivers’
illegal strike;
-Corruptions involving
senior civil servants;
-MRT breakdowns;
-Hong Lim Park’s
protest on Population White Paper.
-CPF and reserves:
More and more people are showing interest and more and more are demanding to
know more.
The following examples
show the constitutional struggles in Singapore:
Hougang by-election
court case: The Court has to give
the meaning of ‘by-election’. However, the
PM finally called it even he has a right to call or not to call one. The PM is
struggling between the PAP and public definition of the Constitution. Is his
decision (to call the by-election) under the pressure of public and
international opinion?
PE2011: The voters clearly have a
better understanding of ‘what an independent President’ can do. They have
clearly rejected the pro-PAP candidate with nearly two-thirds of the votes. The
voters have yet to agree with ‘how independent they want’ and are struggling to
decide the ‘check and balance’ role of an elected president under the
Constitution.
Access to
counsel:
‘Even as the High Court dismissed alleged hacker James Raj Arokiasamy's
application for immediate access to counsel, it ruled prosecutors had failed to
show that allowing him access would have jeopardised investigations.’#3This news
report looks more like a constitutional struggle (to please both sides) to me.
Anti-gay
law:
‘Singapore's High Court on Wednesday dismissed a constitutional challenge against
an archaic law criminalising sex between men, the second such petition turned
down this year. In a written judgment, the court reiterated an earlier ruling
that it was up to Parliament to repeal the provision in the penal code,
known as Section 377A.’ #4 The Court wants to shift the constitutional struggle
back to the Parliament.
Internal
Security Act:
It will be hard to imagine the government can use the ISA as it did in the
past. Malaysia has already done away with it. Under the constitutional
struggle, what is the new political meaning of the ISA? Will it become a
political paper tiger?
Balancing institutions
and constitutions
With
a political norm coming, the past ‘strong’ institutions and ‘weak’
constitutions framework will have to change.
The above examples indicate a new balance between institutions and
constitutions is coming.
Any
future government, whether PAP or oppositions, will not enjoy the same kind of
‘strong’ institutions likes the past.
Similarly, when people are aware of their rights, the demand for more
check and balance, the willingness in political participation, a ‘weak’
constitution will not be possible too.
This
will show the maturity of Singapore and how mature Singaporeans are. Without
the protection of ‘strong’ institutions and ‘weak’ constitutions, will it be
more difficult to run Singapore? And how will it affect the future talent pool
of the PAP leadership? Considering politics no more an easy game, are they
fighters or quitters?
#1
#2
#3
#4
http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/singapore-court-dismisses-challenge-against-anti-gay-law
Comments
Post a Comment